Congressman Jesse Jackson, Jr. |
Jesse
Jackson, Jr. continues to make the claim that he can deliver a shovel-ready
airport at no cost to the taxpayers. He refers to the unsuccessful project that
dates back to 1968 and is known as the Peotone Airport. The State of Illinois
calls it the South Suburban Airport. Jackson calls it the Abraham Lincoln
National Airport. Make no mistake, none of these projects are close to becoming
a shovel-ready project at no cost to the taxpayers.
In a recent rah-rah
speech in Kankakee, at the southern reaches of Jackson’s newly-drawn second
congressional district at a meeting of the NAACP, Jackson made this outlandish
statement.
I’d like Jackson to
explain how a project could be shovel ready when more than half of the land
needed for a new airport remains in the hands of landowners unwilling to sell
to the state. Or, how does he consider a project shovel-ready when it hasn’t
even gained approval by the Federal Aviation Administration? And how can it be
shovel-ready when a general aviation airport that is privately owned and
sanctioned by the FAA—Bult Field--already operates in the footprint of the
airport Jackson wants to build?
I’d also like Jackson
to explain how his pet project would not cost the taxpayers. Oh he claims to
have developers who will put up their own money to build the Peotone Airport.
But the construction of the facility is hardly the only cost to building an
airport—one in the cornfields 40 miles south of the City of Chicago. It would
be a facility surrounded by rural land which is serviced by well and septic
systems. It would be located amid creeks and streams that tend to overflow
during heavy rain. Who will pay to build the infrastructure needed to service
an airport in the cornfields if not the taxpayers?
How does Jackson
explain buying the remainder of the land, if not at the taxpayers’ expense? Or
how can Jackson forget about the tens of millions of dollars already spent on
this ill-conceived, folly. Former Illinois Transportation Secretary Kirk Brown once
estimated the state had spent $100 million on the project. That was during his
tenure with the state. He retired in 2002. I can guarantee the bills certainly
didn’t retire with him. The state has continued to wrack up costs for
state-sponsored studies, land acquisition, legal fees, consultants, public
relations work, etc.
That was just the
past. Future cost to the taxpayers will continue to be thrown at this dead-end
project in the form of infrastructure, additional land acquisition costs, and
guaranteed legal fees to fight all the innocent landowners who have been under
pressure to sell their property since this project began.
It all sounds like
the same kind of jive talk we’ve been hearing for years. I don’t believe it for
one moment.
No comments:
Post a Comment
I'd love to hear what you have to say!
While anonymous comments are accepted, they are not encouraged. I have long believed that if something is worth saying, it is worth putting your name to it.